Team A:
18-4 overall
10-1 in their conference
59th in NET
Team B:
13-8 overall
3-7 in their conference
51st in NET
Team A has also beaten team B twice already
NET RANKINGS ARE A SCAM!!
- Thread starter PA_Panther
- Start date
Team A:
18-4 overall
10-1 in their conference
59th in NET
Team B:
13-8 overall
3-7 in their conference
51st in NET
Team A has also beaten team B twice already
The ranking itself is part of but not the whole equation. What’s the above records against Q1, Q2, etc?
TEAM A:
Q1: 3-2
Q2: 4-0
Q3: 4-0
Q4: 7-2
Team B;
Q1: 2-4
Q2: 3-3
Q3: 2-1
Q4: 6-0
There are definitely some oddities this year. I feel like they tweaked it to put more emphasis on margin of victory this year.
How do you lose two Quad 4 games? That’s like getting swept by DePaul.
I’m fired up enough about this latest NCAA scam.. I’m going to reverse engineer this garbage formula and sell it to coaches to buy Pitt a 5star WING
Pitt played 9 games against the quad 4 and even lost 2 of them. Their weak ooc schedule is damning. Also, a quad 2 win isn't equivalent to a quad 2 win. It's a parameter. Obviously beating the #31 net team at home is worth more than beating the like 74th net team at home.
People get caught up on that. Pitts sos is weak and they have bad losses.
People get caught up on that. Pitts sos is weak and they have bad losses.
I’m guessing the teams are
The love for team B really is a very bizarre trend all season
Clemson and Virginia Tech.
The love for team B really is a very bizarre trend all season
There’s no punishment for losing to a Q4 team. Just like there’s no bonus for winning a Q1 game. However, you are punished for playing teams with very bad records. Which are often (but not always) Q4 teams.
Clemson (Team A) has a lot of close wins. To things like the NET, close wins and close losses are pretty similar. The efficiency metric of winning 71-70 is not much different from losing 71-70.
Here’s the things that boost your NET score:
1. Winning games on the road
2. Not losing home games
3. Not playing teams with lots of losses
4. Beating up on your cupcakes by 20+
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
Can we ask the NET/NCAA for a one-time mulligan game so that you can erase from your record a dogsh** performance against one of the worst teams in college basketball?
Asking for a friend of a team that shall not be named..............
I do think removing each team’s best and worst performance would be a solid tweak.
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
I'd prefer to keep our best performance though, because otherwise Iowa State fans would spin it as, if it doesn't count on the NET then did we actually really beat them?.........
At one point VA Tech was 10-1 ooc and 2-6 or something in conference with only wins vs UNC and Duke lol. Kinda funny.
The most mystifying one that I thought stood out was Creighton. But, I mean, it's a formula. If you figure out the numbers used, it's as simple as plugging it in.
The one dude was complaining about st marys being so high on the unc board, but at that point St marys had just 4 losses. 1 was against the net number 1. The 4 losses were by a combined 15 points (with 1 coming in overtime) and was complaining they were ahead of unc. Like no crap they were ahead of unc based on the numbers.
Unc numbers have been plummeting lately not really in total thanks to themselves but their schedule falling apart. Ohio State is almost with a losing record now. They are in a race to mediocrity with Michigan and Indiana, which hurts UNC. Alabama just got blasted. Iowa State has started to fall off. And now College of Charleston lost. This all hurts UNC without them even playing.
Yeah, it's all about hitting the certain metrics that help within their formula. But it's still confounding at times. UNC has lost no games at home, played a great SOS, but have only won like 3 games on the road and just don't hardly blow anyone out. So if you compare them they have a better resume than some teams well ahead of them in the NET, especially if you consider that in three of their losses (I think) they didn't have their only consistently good player. They also have zero quad 2,3, or 4 losses. For just one example, there is a team that is barely over 500 with a 50th ranked SOS while UNC is 15-6 with the 18th SOS and UNC also beat that team away from home and is behind them in the NET.
I'm not complaining or anything because I don't think UNC is very good but the NET is just a terrible metric to anyone who has any basketball sense who can reasonably compare teams.
Last edited:
Oh yeah, I agree it’s bad. Said it on these boards the day it was released. Stupid metrics result in stupid ratings. How you gonna have a metric that includes efficiency margins, but not have that efficiency be weighted based on opponent strength?
To the NET, beating a 15-6 MEAC team by 25 is better than beating a 15-6 Big 12 or SEC team by 15.
I was just sharing with folks what produces higher NET rankings.
Losing to a Quad 4 team is meaningless in and of itself. Playing the Quad 4 team hurts your SOS. And missing out on an opportunity to have a 20 point efficiency margin in a game is costly.
But there’s no specific punishment for losing a Quad 4 game.
so in other words, there will be no punishment for either FSU or Louisville no matter who loses their game this week 🤣
The punishment is that the game has to be played!
